I have recently been seeing a lot of information on Ralph Nader and the Green party. Upon first observations it would seem that this party is most in line with the homesteading values and I was wondering what others on this forum thought. What political party do you see yourself affiliated with, and is the Green party a viable alternative if for nothing else but to make a point to the current 2 party system ?

-- Nick in NC (nick_frank@yahoo.com), August 10, 2000

Answers

I haven't seen the Green Party platform. Always considered them just a bunch of tree huggers. Does anyone have the highlights of their platform. Article in today's paper says in California they appear to be pulling votes away from Gore, which may allow Bush to take the state and its rather large prize of electorial votes. Remember it is not the popular vote which elects presidents, but rather the electorial college vote.

-- Ken S. (scharabo@aol.com), August 10, 2000.

So why do we have/need an electorial college and not use the popular vote?

-- Cindy (atilrthehony_1@yahoo.com), August 10, 2000.

Ten Key Green Party Values: 7 Ecology * Grass Roots Democracy 7 Social Justice 7 Nonviolence 7 Decentralization 7 Community-Based Economics 7 Feminism 7 Respect for Diversity 7 Personal & Global Responsibility 7 Future Focus, Sustainability

For more info: http://www.votenader.org

-- nick (nick_frank@yahoo.com), August 10, 2000.

"Green goals place community and self-reliance over dependency on ever larger absentee corporations and their media, their technology, their capital, and their politicians," said Nader in his acceptance speech.

-- Greenguy (gr86@hotmail.com), August 10, 2000.

The greens are generally Communists. They believe in not allowing citizens to own or have any control over land. They belive in the government having total control over anything that grows. Nader believes there should be no private industry or automobiles. And me, I'm Libertarian but usually vote Republician because I believe in making my own decisions and having control over my own life and the money I earn. The Dems. want the government to control every aspect of our lives.

-- Joe Cole (jcole@apha.com), August 10, 2000.

I love what the Greens stand for! Nicks post was very close. However I always vote Democrat just bcause the Greens can't win. So this bleeding heart, tree hugging, commie, liberal votes Gore this time around. As for countrysiders, they seem to be of melting pot of every kind of opinions. The forum however seems to lean waaaay to the right unless everyone else is quite. I for one really would welcome all points of view. My worst fear is that other opinions aren't posted because of name calling.....Kirk....

-- Kirk Davis (kirkay@yahoo.com), August 10, 2000.

Joe is absolutely correct. The Green Party is simply Communist. No private ownership of anything. The big cooperative. No automobiles, no privately owned business or Corporate entities. A vote for the Green Party is a vote to desolve the Constitution.

-- Mary (barnwood@preferred.com), August 10, 2000.

Well, Kirk, I'm about as far left on this forum as you can get without dropping off the edge of the earth. Can labels and names really hurt us ? After all, it is only a tv screen or computer monitor. No one really calls me too many names and I have been the most controversial fiqure in this forum. Treat us like a book. Read us, absorb what you need. Kick,scream,rant and rave than post something so unique it will shatter every pre-conceived notion and enlighten the world. Good Luck !!

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), August 10, 2000.

Hey Joel, I always believed that thoughtful men of courage and action were more influental than ranting, screaming lunatics.Based on past posts I also think you got yer rights and lefts crossed!( maybe not on your religious posts! lol )

-- Mike (mstydale@aeroinc.net), August 10, 2000.

Joel: As far as I can tell in all parts of the forum people are helpful, they welcome all questions, its great. The forum tends to make us all come together in our love of the homesteading life style. But the religious political side of it just seems to do the opposite! Not everyone has thick skin! If people want to shut you up they call you a name. Don't want to here a liberal point of view? just call it communism! After that thread on abortion how many would risk saying they disagee? Somehow I wish that we could make it safe for everyone. Thats what I think.....Kirk.....P.S Joel I thought you were the most popular?

-- Kirk Davis (kirkay@yahoo.com), August 10, 2000.

The timing on this is kind of coincidental for me because for the first time in my life I'm thinking of voting for a third party candidate instead of the Republican. I really like the Constitution Party and their candidate Howard Phillips. Check out their website: www.constitutionparty.com

-- dave (IA) (tidman@midiowa.net), August 10, 2000.

Kirk, would it help if a person said "what you support is communism" as opposed to "to support these ideals & principles is communism"? I don't see this as name calling. I think if a person supports the ideals and principles of a political party or a particular worldview - they have defined and "named" themselves. As an example I support the ideals & principles & truth found in scripture, should I be upset if someone "calls" me a bible believing christian? Or even a "right wing conservative"? Go ahead, call me "names", they define my belief system. Now, if someone calls me an idiot, that is different(they can think it, just not say it aloud. he-he). There is a difference. I am proud of the "names" if they are accurate, but to skew the definition to project an image that is not accurate, indicates a weakness on the part of the name caller. But if the definition is accurate it indicates the name caller speaks truth, even if we dont like it. Just a thought. God Bless Wendy

-- Wendy@GraceAcres (wjl7@hotmail.com), August 10, 2000.

If you move far enough left, you actually merge to the right. Same as if you move far enough right, you eventually move to the left. Is it irony, Yin/yang or just the fact that political party philosophy is circular? There was some reason that Fascists and Communists used to "hold hands", you know... I pretty much like the center, a little to the left, and am mostly a Pragmatist! Should I start a political party now? ;)

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), August 10, 2000.

As a forum of people filled with strong opinions, I think that of course people are going to express their opinions strongly. If a person really believes in their own position, this is a natural state. If you don't believe that liberalism is communism then tell us why. Debate is an art form. The way to persuade or present requires that you state your position. I honestly think there are a few on this forum who would prefer to say something and get only positive responses. That isn't realistic. I am totally prepared to defend any position I present on this forum, because I know there are those out there that disagree. I don't consider their response an attack. I consider it making an defence, presenting a case, discussing an issue. What I espouse was recently called fascism, but you didn't see me go running the other way. So big deal someone thinks I am fascist. I've been called worse. I know it isn't true. I don't even consider it name calling although the person who said it may have. I am fully prepared to deal with why I am not a fascist, so what is the big deal? If a person doesn't have thick skin and can't handle the emotionality of the religious or political posts then perhaps they should stick to the other fine posts on this forum. I looked up fascism in the Dictionary. Here is the definition. Fascism- a system of government characterized by dictatorship, belligerant nationalism, militarism, etc. First instituted in Italy(1922-43) In contrast I am for a constitutionally based democratic republic first instituted in 1776 in the United States of America. Therefore I am not a fascist. So when called a fascist it rolls of me like water on a ducks back, because it simply isn't true.

Little Bit Farm

-- Little bit Farm (littlebit@calinet.com), August 11, 2000.

Little Bit, you have a strong sense of your beliefs and what you want to say. Bravo. With respect to letting "derogatory" comments flow off your back, ditto. However, I must say that since this is a public forum, consideration of the content of what we post to each other would be nice.

When people call each other fascists, communists, etc., one might do well to consider the wider audience here. Other readers might not go look up the term and consider the information. I know it's not really "our" responsibility to educate anyone, but it would be nice to at least consider that we try to be factual with what we present as "facts".... I have to say that, if someone calls somebody a fascist (i.e. when incorrectly applied),it DOES bother me. It's not the name calling, it's the inaccuracy of the application!!! Calling a liberal a communist is just as bad. It's like calling a Canadian a Yankee. He might not react to the fact that you just insulted him, but rather that you got your facts mixed up!!

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), August 11, 2000.

OK, Kirk, I hear you but you wouldn't believe some of the private replies I get. Popular ? not really ! See the following views are not popular. 1. Political Parties ? I wouldn't waste my time. My time is better spent porting an AK-47 for speed and accuracy to defend myself from the fools they elect. 2. Abortion This is a topic better left to the private mind. The world would have ended by now if all the children that weren't born were here. If you except all the medical advances of the 19th century such as-cancer treatments and heart surgeries- than in effect you must accept abortion also. If we had kept abortion in the back streets right next to the porno shops, we would have a better world. 3. Organized Religion-- God is not for sale and I don't care how you sugar coat the church, they are selling God. People of true religion show it in their lives and need no building to show me who they are. 4, Homesteading--is a way to remove more of the "State" from your life than any other method I know of. Probably the safest place to be when the up coming war breaks. City streets will offer hand to hand conflict with wholesale murder,rape and plunder. Same as it was yesterday but without some fiqurehead fools to lead us in the so called name of justice. **** Now You Say that I am Popular ? No, I am controversial ! Just like the United States, there is no true justice left. Little Bit is correct when she says-"God is in control"- we are just pawns in the game in life. God and what he puts upon our hearts to say and act upon is all we truly have. So speak your mind--even if others conceive you to be wrong. By offering opposing views than we all become the stronger and wiser for it

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), August 11, 2000.

Right/Left, while terms I occasionaly use, are representative of a false scale where the default setting is modern authoritarianism. That is the only way that one could believe that one can "slip around to the other side". Left and right had distinctly different meanings than they do now when they were coined. Freedom does not balance somewhere between communism and fascism. The personal freedom part of the equation, the most critical part of the equation, is entirely left out of the right/left (and ever changing "centrist") sliding scale. Historically speaking from a left/right point of view, fascism and communism are both on the same side of the "scale", both authoritarian socialism, despite what you may have been taught. Even if you dont agree with these guys, try this little political quiz (10 questions) to get you thinking. http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html

-- William in WI (thetoebes@webtv.net), August 11, 2000.

My vote right now is "none of the above"! In the past I've tried to vote for what I considered the lesser of two evils. I'm not sure there is one this time.....What happened to Alan Keyes?

-- Mona (jascamp@ipa.net), August 11, 2000.

So hate me. I took the quiz and here's what I got, no surprize this: Left liberal. Left-Liberals prefer self-government in personal matters and central decision-making on economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Leftists tolerate social diversity, but work for economic equality. Interesting that I vote Republican about a 1/3 of the time, and voted independent for the last couple of presidential elections. hmmm...

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), August 11, 2000.

Little Bit: You want to debate communism. Thats not what I'm trying to say. I'm talking about making it a safe place for all opinions. Maybe you think the Greens Are communists and you have the right to say so but that doesn't create a safe place to post. On your abortion post you used the word murder. Is that a safe word for dialog? Now you may want to debate about that but I'd rather be of some help to someone facing that horrible problem. I say we could make it safe for them to be heard. On the homesteading end we like all peoples opinions and they might find some help with a problem. Why is it so hard to see it could be the same with politics and religion? Very respectfully.....Kirk....

-- Kirk Davis (kirkay@yahoo.com), August 11, 2000.

Kirk I honestly don't know how to respond to this. While reading this post keep in mind that right at the moment I am extremely frustrated, because I just spent an hour and a half researching and writing a post for the board and my son came along and sent it to cyber heaven. I guess the only thing I can say about this Kirk is that there are no safe places. This forum isn't a therapy group. We aren't here to disect our feelings. We are here to express them. I am sorry that you seem to struggle with wanting everything to always be nice, but life isn't like that. There are always going to be people who disagree with you. There are always going to be people who disagree with me. That is the way things are. I don't even want everyone to agree with me. That would make for a boring world indeed. I never said I wanted to debate communism although I would given the opportunity. In fact on this thread I did not mention communism at all, until my answer. If I went up and shot someone with a shotgun would it be ok to say that is murder, or would you need to provide me a safe place and call it unexpected termination of a life force. Sometimes we need to call things what they are, even if it doesn't sound nice. I think this forum provides the "safest" place we can and still discuss the issues. Here you can state your opinion and not be cussed at, and called dirty names. I think everyone here responds to one another's issues without being rude, or angry for the most part. I think what you are looking for is for people to not say anything controversial because it makes you feel better. I am afraid that as long as I am here that ain't gonna happen. I express my beliefs because they are a part of who I am. I will not hide them, because someone else might disagree. All of you are welcome to express your beliefs also. That doesn't mean I won't express mine right back. It may feel safer, never to have to take what you believe out and really have to look at it and examine it, but for the betterment of society perhaps it is better to do it once in a while. If presented with a woman pregnant and alone and she told me she was thinking of getting an abortion, I would tell her not to. I would and have done that. I am looking for a safe place for that baby she carries inside her, not to make her feel safe in her decision to hurt her child. I am sorry if you cannot deal with that, but that is the way it is.

Little Bit Farm

-- Little bit Farm (littlebit@calinet.com), August 11, 2000.

Ok everyone, I took the quiz and I am a centrist. Ha! ha! ha! That is the funniest thing I've ever heard. If I am a centrist then waht is a right wing conservative like?

Little Bit Farm

-- Little bit Farm (littlebit@calinet.com), August 11, 2000.

Wow!! Sorry Little Bit I lost my head for a while! I'll get back to family, cats, and homesteading my real love and leave the political stuff to others! This is only a message board. Real life is funner!!....Kirk.....

-- Kirk Davis (kirkay@yahoo.com), August 11, 2000.

Little Bit, I am glad you didn't back down. You are right, it doesn't make things better to use euphemisms -- it is much better to be honest and call them by their real names. Makes it a little harder for people to pretend that they aren't doing anything wrong.

-- Kathleen Sanderson (stonycft@worldpath.net), August 12, 2000.

I also took the "Political Philosophy" Quiz, how interesting! Right- conservative. Husband scored Centrist (very near right- conservative). Try this quiz, it is worth the time. Wendy

-- Wendy@GraceAcres (wjl7@hotmail.com), August 12, 2000.

I considered myself a conservative republican, according to the quiz I'm Libertarian! Thanks to the person who shared that website.

-- Lenore (archambo@winco.net), August 12, 2000.

I just know I'm going to be sorry for this but since Nick asked a sincere question and Kirk asked for even the quiet ones to speak up, here goes. First, I agree with Kirk that people should be kind. Doesn't anyone ever wonder how humans can have existed for so many thousands of years and we still haven't figured out how to raise our children so they are all healthy, happy, and productive? Or that we still haven't learned how not to make war on each other? Or that we have to have separate cities, counties, states, and countries each with their own agendas and jostling for position? No this isn't communism, it's common sense that says if we stop thinking about ourselves and consider the end results, we would be much better off. I don't buy the theory that it is human nature. That's bull and a copout for bad behavior. "God made me this way and I can't help it." As for voting, I vote the Democratic Party usually, because although all parties say they want the same things it's the way they aim to achieve those results that make the difference. The only way to know how the politicians (parties) really affect the country is to watch how they vote on specific issues. The Republican "trickle-down" theory is simply giving the rich guys the breaks on the assumption that if they make money, they will provide jobs, etc. Personally I've been trickled on long enough.

-- Peg (NW WI) (wildwoodfarms@hushmail.com), August 12, 2000.

My sweetie says I'm going to "waste my vote" when I vote for Nader. (No, I'm not a communist, and I am totally in favor of private ownership; I'm just not in favor of government being controlled only by those with enough money to buy their own politicians).

I say SHE is going to waste HER vote by voting for Gore - "the lesser of two evils" Who needs either of the two evils, for crying out loud?

joj

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.net), August 15, 2000.

"Personally I've been trickled on long enough.

Then you better reconsider. The upswing in the economy began in the end of the Bush years because of Reagans actions. As business was able to reinvest and complete R&D, our corporate stability in the world market and technology levels increased. This is what created the jobs and the booming economy we had until recently. We are presently finishing out that wave while Clinton & Co cooks the books. If the trickling stops any time soon, and Clintons book cooking becomes evident, you are gong to see one heck of a crash. It takes years for any positive economic actions taken by a president to become evident but a economicly bungling president can crash one overnight.

-- William in WI (thetoebes@webtv.net), August 15, 2000.

Nick in NC,

If you would like, I can explain why each of the Green Parties top 10 greatest hits here are bad for the country and freedom. I would prefer not to go into all of that on this forum because the truth makes some people pout.

I would like as a starter though to point out that this party, while possibly well meaning, is grossly ignorant of the purpose of government and the control that "We the People" can exert through the free market or is fully aware and is putting forth this drivel for nefarious purposes.

What is this nonsense?Grass Roots Democracy

Democracy-A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. Results in Mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic, negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, wether it be based on deliberation or governed by passion, predjudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism, licence, agitation, discontent, anarchy.

Republic- Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed priciples and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought under its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyrann or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress. A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of (1) an executive and
(2) a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation, all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create
(3) a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental act and to recognize
(4) certain inherent individual rights.

Take away any one or more or those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy.

A republic is superior to all others. Autocracy declares the divine right of kings; its authority can not be questioned; its powers are arbitrarily or unjustly administered. Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been re-peatedly tried without success. Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic.

In other words, Grass Roots Democracy = 3 wolves and a sheep voting on what is for supper.

-- William in WI (thetoebes@webtv.net), August 15, 2000.

Hey, since we are posting lists, here's one. Could someone, preferably from the great state of Texas please comment? I don't believe everything I read on email (nor should we all) but this interested me... anyone have any resources for verification/nullification? Thanks!

The state of Texas, under the leadership of Governor George W. Bush, is ranked:

50th in spending for teachers' salaries; 49th in spending on the environment; 48th in per capita funding for public health; 47th in delivery of social services; 42nd in child support collections; and 41st in per capita spending on public education.

BUT ... Texas is:

5th in percentage of population living in poverty; 1st in air and water pollution; 1st in percentage of poor working parents without insurance; 1st in percentage of children without health insurance; and 1st in executions (avg. 1 every 2 weeks for Bush's 5 years).

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), August 15, 2000.

Hi Jumpoff! Thought you disapeared. Yea Sheepish. Dismal record in Texas. William I'm done pouting. I got confused. You see I thought we were posting opinions. If we are posting the absolute truth I'm out of my league!....Kirk...

-- Kirk Davis (kirkay@yahoo.com), August 15, 2000.

Regarding Texas-First of all I am going to state up fron that these are my opinions and NOT solid statistical (gee, who gathers statistics?) fact, also I am not a Native Texan which makes me kind of a second class citizen here so take these things into account please.

1) Teachers Salaries...Texas has a tremendously large number of Homeschooling parents. Also, there isn't as large of a "metropolitan" populace here as you might imagine. Meaning that the cost of living and therefore the property tax dollars in most of the state are lower than say Ohio.

2) Spending for the Environment....In the Austin area at least the local governments have become very adept at simply taking the land out of private ownership by passing law that do not allow folks to use property they own to live on, and disallowing sale of said land to any private party,, then buying it from the owners at a greatly reduced price, waiting a year and selling it to corporations for 20 times what they paid. In other words they are a pack of liars. They played on peoples desire to protect the environment (the Barton Springs Salamander and the Cave Cricket and the Texas Horned Toad and God only knows what else), pass legislation to do so, at very low expense, then they fail to "protect" what they say they have infringed on property owners lives to protect. Government at it's best. So as far as spending goes they keep the governmental costs down by using the legislative powers to steal from the common man. This sounds all convoluted, but it's what has been happening here since I first came here.

3) Public Health Spending.....Sorry to say I don't care at all about this. I wish Texas were last in this category.

4)Delivery of Social Services...Ditto above. I think the only way to handle any type of social welfare is on a local level or you run into all of the abuses of power inherent in bureauacracy and the people it is supposed to help don't get the kind of help they need.

5) Well they have started arresting "dead beats" at an alarming pace. Again, there are some bureaucratic problems such as a parent sending needed funds to the custodial parent only through the State agency which then holds the money for a month or two before sending it on to the custodial parent. Many bypass the bureaucracy by sending the funds directly to their "ex" and get hauled off for not paying. Then many don't pay at all because they are scum.

6) See answer number 1 and look for the disparity of funds in the pockets of the schools bureauacracy leaders. We do spend a ton on football!

BUT Texas is ......

5th in poverty.....it's a big state with a large rural area.

1st in oil & air pollution...fill up your gas tank. Can't make much in the petrol department without polluting things.

1st in poor w/out insurance....more social programs are in the making here to increase the public debt to the government. Don't worry we will soon catch up with such states as CA.

1st in children w/out....see above. The taxpayers are now going to insure children under x income for $20 per month. I am sure it will be a great program.

1st in executions....trying to keep overhead down on the prisons so that we can get more of other states criminals in here so you don't have to deal with 'em. But really, if it's a murder and they DID it they should pay the ultimate cost.

I won't be voting for the Shrub party. But not because of Texas, because of the fact that he is a member of all of King Bill's groups. The new boss.....

-- Doreen (liberty546@hotmail.com), August 16, 2000.

To reply to sheepish: Quote: 50th in spending for teachers' salaries; 49th in spending on the environment; 48th in per capita funding for public health; 47th in delivery of social services; 42nd in child support collections; and 41st in per capita spending on public education.

BUT ... Texas is:

5th in percentage of population living in poverty; 1st in air and water pollution; 1st in percentage of poor working parents without insurance; 1st in percentage of children without health insurance; and 1st in executions (avg. 1 every 2 weeks for Bush's 5 years). UnQuote

Your email was a pro democrat vote for Gore by bashing Bush VIA bashing Texas scheme using fuzzy math on the statistics.

1. If the teachers were already making good wages, why up it? Statistic = no raises.

2. Environment. If you have laws in place already to prevent environmental hazards, and enforce these laws, then what more spending do you need. Personally I enjoy the fresh air and good water here compared to Chicago, LA, etc. I've never seen a polluted smelly lake in Texas. statistics = No environmental spending

3. Poor working parents without insurance. Yep, you are going to have that in any state. And because the population in Texas is so large, you can show the statistics to say we're #1.

4. Delivery of Social Services. They don't deliver in Texas, you have to go get it. Seriously though, based on what?

5. Child support. Fella's/girls, they will rake you over the coals here in Texas for skipping out of child support. They will issue an arrest warrant and arrest you, if they can find you. So with a large population, large state, the statistics will show that a large number of uncollected support. Again, fuzzy statistics.

6. Public education. Once again, how did they come up with this? Spending on what? Or did they "forget" to mention this?

7. Death penalty. If you come to Texas and murder someone, you in turn will be killed. That should tell you that if you plan on murdering someone, don't do it in Texas. I like it, the victims family and loved ones like it, the bleeding heart liberals dislike it. An eye for an eye. It gives a pretty good incentive to not murder, too bad all 50 states aren't like that.

Sorry, not my email address, I hate spammers.....

-- Tinman (Someone@somewhere.com), November 13, 2000.